How to implement a second row type for sub rows?

[varwasabi]

I'm using the expanded rows functionality but on the expanded rows i have a differing data set.

Using the same cell method in the columnDefs sticks to the first type but i need a way for it to reference the subRow type. i.e. when in the cell if row.depth is 1 then everything on row would need to reference the second type otherwise it would work as is out of the box.

[Doesntmeananything]

I have a similar use case. In my table, I'd like to have parent rows to be a simple label with a button to toggle expanded state. Ideally, these would be a different type compared to children rows.

For now, I work around this by making the parent rows the same type as the children rows, however that leads to a number of type issues as the table grows in complexity.

Essentially, I'm looking for a way to define the inverse of sub-components (as shown here), where the parent row is a separate type that is still defined within the table data model.

[raphaelboukara]

Hi :)
I have the exact same use case where the type of the sub rows is not the same like the parents.

ex:

type data = { id: string, firstname: string, comments: { id: string, content: string }[] }[];

My table looks like this:

______________________________________________________________
|                                   |     comment 1
|  user1 (rowSpan 3)                |     comment 2
|                                   |     comment 3
______________________________________________________________
|                                   |     comment 4
|  user2 (rowSpan 3)                |     comment 5
|                                   |     comment 6
______________________________________________________________

Maybe it does not make sense to use sub rows feature to handle this use case?